All the value of life is given by death.
Without death we would be irretrievably lost.
Death lifts everything from insignificance.
Even if then, I'm pretty sure, no one dies.
For the simple reason that no one lives.
All the value of life is given by death.
What about intersubjectivity? How are we to gain consciousness of the other, other than as a mere object, if love undoes consciousness?
The brain, and all connected to it, is perception considering its composition, that of atoms, is a series of actions and reactions resulting from mirroring. Mirroring is perception.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sun Jun 12, 2022 6:09 amIn terms of philosophy, 'absolute' is totally unconditional upon anything i.e. existing by itself.
How can perception emerge without a brain and what-is-perceived?
Perception is conditioned by the person, brain and what-is-perceived.
As such it cannot be absolute.
In any case that 'perception is absolute' has no practical philosophical value at all.
When a theist claim 'god is absolute' it meant God is untainted by anything thus it pure to be believed for one's salvation to avoid the inherent fear of death and hellfire. This is irrational and for that purpose only, but there are rational alternatives to resolve the fundamental psychological problem that drives irrational theism.
On the other hand to accept all perception are conditioned by the person, brain and what-is-perceived [no absolute] is highly useful because we can then develop models and strategies to improve perception where there are its related issues.
In my opinion we need to try to understand what love is.
What 'perception' are you talking about?Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Thu Jun 16, 2022 10:03 pmThe brain, and all connected to it, is perception considering its composition, that of atoms, is a series of actions and reactions resulting from mirroring. Mirroring is perception.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sun Jun 12, 2022 6:09 amIn terms of philosophy, 'absolute' is totally unconditional upon anything i.e. existing by itself.
How can perception emerge without a brain and what-is-perceived?
Perception is conditioned by the person, brain and what-is-perceived.
As such it cannot be absolute.
In any case that 'perception is absolute' has no practical philosophical value at all.
When a theist claim 'god is absolute' it meant God is untainted by anything thus it pure to be believed for one's salvation to avoid the inherent fear of death and hellfire. This is irrational and for that purpose only, but there are rational alternatives to resolve the fundamental psychological problem that drives irrational theism.
On the other hand to accept all perception are conditioned by the person, brain and what-is-perceived [no absolute] is highly useful because we can then develop models and strategies to improve perception where there are its related issues.
So perception is not conditioned on the brain, it is conditioned on itself.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perception
Perception (from Latin perceptio 'gathering, receiving') is the organization, identification, and interpretation of sensory information in order to represent and understand the presented information or environment.[2]
All perception involves signals that go through the nervous system, which in turn result from physical or chemical stimulation of the sensory system.[3]
Vision involves light striking the retina of the eye; smell is mediated by odor molecules; and hearing involves pressure waves.
Perception is not only the passive receipt of these signals, but it is also shaped by the recipient's learning, memory, expectation, and attention.[4][5]
Sensory input is a process that transforms this low-level information to higher-level information (e.g., extracts shapes for object recognition).[5] The process that follows connects a person's concepts and expectations (or knowledge), restorative and selective mechanisms (such as attention) that influence perception.
Perception depends on complex functions of the nervous system, but subjectively seems mostly effortless because this processing happens outside conscious awareness.[3] Since the rise of experimental psychology in the 19th century, psychology's understanding of perception has progressed by combining a variety of techniques.[4] Psychophysics quantitatively describes the relationships between the physical qualities of the sensory input and perception.[6] Sensory neuroscience studies the neural mechanisms underlying perception.
You do not clarify here what is perception.
In exhibiting ancient ideas, we should at least put some effort into setting them up against a new background, not just parroting something that was stated 200 years ago.
In reality, the rediscovery is not so much about ancient ideas.Fja1 wrote: ↑Sat Jun 18, 2022 11:54 pmIn exhibiting ancient ideas, we should at least put some effort into setting them up against a new background, not just parroting something that was stated 200 years ago.
I'm sure we could argue for weeks whether old = new, in what sounds like the fictional, impoverished language in Orwell's '1984', but that's beside the point; all I hoped is that you add some nuance to the familiar-sounding questions around love, death, etc.bobmax wrote: ↑Sun Jun 19, 2022 5:28 amIn reality, the rediscovery is not so much about ancient ideas.
Because those ideas are useful, if anything, to awaken a knowledge that is already in us.
Would we like to believe that the Truth can be there and not here?
That it may once have not been there and then someone made it be?
Even just to communicate between us it is necessary that the Truth is already everywhere.
Communication is but an awakening of awareness.
There is never anything really new.
But at the same time what emerges in me is always unique. Because in everyone the awakening is personal.
And if you have faith in the Truth, you are never repeating anything parrot, but you are choosing among all the ideas, that are proposed inside and outside of you, those with which to build your philosophy.
The philosophy is always new and always the same.
By now there are more of my lifelong companions who have died than those who are still alive.
Annette,Annette Campbell wrote: ↑Thu Jun 16, 2022 3:48 pm I have a similar view as well. In my opinion, Perception is underrated. Perception is of great epistemological importance. Originally we perceive the knowledge about the world using our five senses: sight, hearing, touch, taste, and smell later it may be acquired through testimony. I think we don't talk about perception enough(or maybe it is just that I rarely came across anything related to perception). Although it is not reality it can become a person's reality. Perception acts as a lens through which we view reality. Perception creates our experience of the world around us and allows us to act within our environment. Perception is very important in understanding human behavior because every person perceives the environment around him differently and approaches life problems differently. Perception is the sensory experience of the world.
Surely action is constructible in the logic of language. In a statement such as "I drink water", the reactive implications fall outside of the topic. It simply invokes a dichotomy of action/inaction.popeye1945 wrote: ↑Mon Jun 20, 2022 11:57 pmI invite anyone to give me an example of human action which would not more properly be termed reaction. Even the physical world reacts to the totality of its parts and with this it's ever so slowly changing it affects biological life to react in kind as change.